What we know now
James Forsyth 10:42am
Here are a few things that I think we’ve learnt from last night’s result:
1). The Tories are now the best closers in British politics: In London, the local elections and last night the Tories did significantly better than the final opinion polls suggested they would. This suggests that the Tory ground game is now good enough to add a couple of points to their score. At the next election, this could make the difference between a slim and solid Tory majority.
2). ‘Tory hatred’ no longer moves votes: The Labour campaign desperately tried to whip up prejudice against a public school educated, lawyer who looked and sounded like a Tory. But this tactic comprehensively failed in a normally safe Labour seat; the electoral sting appears to have been finally drawn from the ‘Tory boy’ stereotype. The importance of this is that it means there is unlikely to be much, if any, anti-Tory tactical voting at the next election.
3). Labour has no positive message: The Labour campaign in Crewe and Nantwich as unremittingly negative as Labour had nothing positive to say. Indeed, when Harriet Harman was asked on the Today programme what Labour could offer voters the best thing she could come up with was some blather about home insulation.
4).The Tories are hungry: As Fraser notes in his political column, there were worries that the Tories were simply not hungry enough to capitalise on their opportunities. But in Crewe and Nantwich, the Tories saw the breach in Labour’s defences and poured through it. Cameron might have ordered all his MPs to the constituency but I haven’t heard a single MP complain about having to go while most Tories are boasting about how many times they have been up there.
5). This will get nasty: The BNP weren’t standing in Crewe and Nantwich and Labour responded by acting as if they wanted their votes; proof that Labour are now so desperate that they will try anything to win. When you consider how personal Labour went on a by-election candidate, you can deduce just how much mud Labour plan to throw at Cameron in a general election campaign. Encouragingly, though, the voters don’t seem to be buying the negative attacks at the moment.
Previous
Comments
Tiberius
May 23rd, 2008 11:28amSo how big is the opportunity that is opening up for the Tories? Cameron's strategy of transforming the Party has certainly been a huge success, but how radical will or should he be? It is not feasible to expect him to unravel 45 years of Leftist infiltration of the country's institutions: even Margaret Thatcher was unable to complete a full swing of the axe. Cameron's inheritance is going to be dreadful; as Francis Maude explained rather well on QT, the public finances are so stretched, we should not expect tax breaks early on.
For my money, it is the social agenda that should and could be addressed first: welfare, education, and the social chapter and all that goes with it. Policy on the first two is well advanced, but the third is tied up with the "wait an see" agenda Cameron has over the whole EU thing.
But above all, Dave, don't fail where the best and worst of our previous PMs have: losing touch with the mood of the country. Cameron is probably going to get at least two terms, and Michael Portillo's description of how Margaret Thatcher fell into this trap is lesson to learn from.
Ian C
May 23rd, 2008 11:43amThe other thing I think we probably know is that Brown is going to have to take a large political risk of some kind not yet on the agenda, in the not too distant future, to attempt a turn around. If that remotely fails he will be de-selected, whether by a challenge (less likely) or a drubbing in Parliament.
If he has any sense he will drop 42 days after last night. If he sticks with it he is dead meat and he may not get the chance to attempt something else.
I feel it in my bones that he will not survive until 2010, but cannot yet see the exact method of his being put out of our misery. The mood of teh country will alter once we know (and the currency will bounce).
Paul B
May 23rd, 2008 12:14pmThe by election demonstrates in a nutshell that the complete nulab project, without the blessed (through clenched teeth) and talented, vicar of St Albion, is a complete sham, a clueless, and morally bankrupt idea. Its leaders basic instincts are now quite simply old fashioned tax & spend, Nanny & Granddad Brown knows best. Its an old fashioned 1945 style administration,. void of any constructive policies for the early 21st centuty and out of touch with the aspirational but sensible people it seeks to govern. This type of administratrion was found out by the voters as long ago by as the 1950s. Its (nulab) a thoroughly obnoxious, elitist organisatio It is clinging by its fingernails to power. Its now a cornered, vicious, nasty and dangerous animal. The comrades will turn increaslingly vicious, spitting and lashing out at anything that approaches it. I predict it will turn in on itself and the in fighting will be red in tooth & claw.
All DC has to do now imo is keep his distance, keep stirring the pot,stay calm, treat the voters with respect, give them hope and positive reasons to vote for him. Explain patiently, that the Tory's are the egalitarian party, they reward & encourage responsible hard working people decent people , they will take burden of government off peoples backs and allow people to enjoy in a responsible way the rewards of their own hard labour. Whilst stating the above they should also be re-iterating time & time that genuienly disadvantaged people have nothing to fear and all to gain from a party that belives in the power of people ( excuse the cliche) rather than the power of the state
Faceless Bureaucrat
May 23rd, 2008 12:35pmTiberius [11.28]
Wise words, as ever. As has been posted elsewhere, DC needs to reinforce the belief among the electorate that he wants more than just to be PM, but wants to use it to do good for the country. People will not stand for another PM at the helm who reeks of 'power for power's sake'. Personally, I believe DC will deliver in this respect and that the 'policy lite' approach is a good one at this time. Afer all, the last this the Conservatives need right now is to become a supplier of decent and popular policies to an increasingly desperate government. Still a long road to travel, to be sure, but I believe DC and the Conservatives can deliver.
CS
May 23rd, 2008 12:42pmAlthough I've banged on for years that someone's background is less important than what he...well, you know the drill - I've always assumed that most of the country were beholden to kneejerk anti-toffery. (please note that "toffery" is not another word for a Thorntons shop).
I still think that the inner circle of 13 OEs has some mileage but the country seems at last to have woken up to the fact that a (fairly) honest toff is preferable to a duplicitous member of the new political establishment with all the trappings of the toff but a Mockney accent to disguise it.
The only people still fooled by the argument are the media.
Brown abolishes the 10p tax rate for nothing more than an electoral gimmick, reinstates it at the cost of increased borrowing and the risk of 18 million people "losing out" next year...and it's Boris who get's characterised as the twit.
Brown plots and schemes for over ten years to become PM and then takes less than 12 months to wreck Labour's electoral support...and it's Boris who gets characterised as the buffoon.
Ken Livingstone calls jews concentration camp guards and cuddles clerics who advocate stringing up gays...and it's Boris who gets characterised as gaffe-prone.
Nicholas
May 23rd, 2008 12:42pmWatching and listening to the various post-mortems this morning I can only conclude that New Labour are in serious in denial.
They are all parroting that this is just about the economy. It is fun picking out the copycat phrases in the spin they have been given to chant. Must be the vocal influence of that Welshman "Dai Lama", they think if they keep chanting the mantra there will be a miraculous intervention for them.
The worst example was McNulty on Daily Politics, completely dismissing the result as of no consequence and repeating (the very boring) mantra about Brown being the person best placed to steer the ship of state through the troubled waters ahead, blah, blah, blah.
They just do not get it do they. In the Autumn when he though he might win Brown considered a general election. Now that the mood of the country has been so clearly demonstrated to New Labour he should call one now.
New Labour have long overstayed their welcome. Must we endure two more years of their miserable government?
TrevorH
May 23rd, 2008 12:44pmRadical?
Maybe, but we need to be realistic. We need to do what is right. Good solid Conservative principles.
Remember when she first came into office Mrs T and Howe put up taxes, the economy was in a mess they needed to.
The big problem an incoming Tory govt will have is managing expectations. We will not inherit a good economy like in 1997, Labour will manage the economy with a view to looking good, spending borrowing is out of control, to do what's needed NOW will consign Labour to the dustbin.
So expect any incoming Tory govt to have a mess to clean up, Tories need to start looking serious and grave right now.
DW
May 23rd, 2008 12:49pmSee Cameron's speech to the C and N Tories today on BBC website. He is a remarkably astute and capable performer. He gets across naturally what Brown cannot deliver with all the media training in the world.
cuffleyburgers
May 23rd, 2008 1:24pmSensible posting Paul B, my view exactly.
David Lindsay
May 23rd, 2008 3:50pmThe real story here is that Cameron can win without having to please the Tory base in the least, and indeed while defining himself against it for the amusement of the BBC/Fleet Street dinner party circuit.
So, all you tax-cutters, benefit-cutters, Eurosceptics, family values believers, tough-on-crime types, and the rest, forget it. Cameron has proved that he can be as vicious as he likes to you and still win.
You have no hope either way in 2010. You should all abstain, so that the consequent collapse of the Tories even after all the hype can lead to the emergence of one or more parties speaking for you instead.
The Lone Groover
May 23rd, 2008 4:08pmI thought I'd visit the Sun's website to find out what the influential section of the media is thinking. It seems they are still unconvinced by DC - They seem to be asking the Tories to supply Mr. Broon with more policy ideas.
It's the Sun wot won it - and it'll be the Sun wot'll decide when the game is up. Mark my words.
Andrew Landriani
May 23rd, 2008 4:18pmThe simple fact is that ZaNuLab never really existed. It was a media spin on the Labour party, whether we call it real labour, old labour, hidden labour or any other kinda labour. It was all the same - pity its taken 14 years and most of the nation's wealth to rumble this fact.
Now the great British people have seen the truth and understood where their interests truly are we have to get on with the important work of preparing the ground for the general election victory to come. We arent ready yet but are well on the way. My betting is that McBrown will be challenged for the leadership by the time of the labour party conference unless he jumps first - and I'm willing to bet he wont jump (its not in his psyche). One things for sure. the labour meltdown isnt over yet (not remotely)!
Cameron is quite right in his approach and in not going into geek's details about 'policies' and 'what we'd do in government'. The narrative isnt about the views of an 'alternative government'its about how badly labour have done over 11+ years with very little to stand in their way. For the first time in history the British people have had a chance to see that an unimpeded, majority labour government without a recession on their watch STILL can't achieve anything worthwhile for this country and this time they cant blame it all on the 'wicked tories'.
The labour defeat clock is ticking...
David Lindsay
May 23rd, 2008 4:23pmAnd not even that many more policy ideas, The Lone Groover. Nor are they necessarily any good.
According to the next Tory Leader, George "Children Don't Need Fathers" Osborne, mentioning immigration (at least to the lower orders, who are most affected by it) is "dog-whistle politics", and any party that does it is "the nasty party".
Remember that one.
Nick Kaplan
May 23rd, 2008 4:50pmDavid Lindsay said “So, all you tax-cutters, benefit-cutters, Eurosceptics, family values believers, tough-on-crime types, and the rest, forget it. Cameron has proved that he can be as vicious as he likes to you.”
David, I really wish you would bother to do some sort of research before you make your assertions, perhaps that way they would be less ludicrous. You don’t appear to have the slightest idea what Cameron stands for, and I struggle to believe that you have listen to anything he has said or done over the last couple of years. Try reading this excellent outline of Cameron’s philosophy:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/686456/cameron-answers-your-questions.thtml This clearly shows that Cameron is a Conservative who believes in a smaller state, lower taxes, individual liberty, and strong families. He just has considerably more skill in presenting ideas in a way that voters will find attractive, than other recent Tory leaders did. If you seriously believe that Cameron’s restoration of the Conservative Party’s electoral hopes has been a betrayal of traditional Conservatives you are more deluded then I thought.
Frank Pulley
May 23rd, 2008 5:11pmJust add Crewe and Nantwich to Waterloo on the list of battles won on the playing fields of Eton. Or as the Iron Duke himself would have said, "Ha!"
And just remember, Dave, what else he said, "If there's anything worse than losing a battle, it's winning one."
Mainly because, I suspect, he knew that he knew that somebody was going to have to clean up the mess.
But for the time being, satisfaction is in order.
Paul B and Tiberius: sagacious comments indeed. You just qualified for the think-tank that someone was on about a few days ago. Takes those men's names and email addresses, James.
Frank Pulley
May 23rd, 2008 5:16pmDavid Lindsay
Dunno about dog-whistle politics but today I'm prepared to accept, to use an old cockney accolade, that the Tory Party is the dog's boll*x!
David Lindsay
May 23rd, 2008 5:24pmHe only says that on here or in similar places, Nick Kaplan. He says the exact opposite, insofar as he says anything, to the country at large. And just look at what he actually does.
Unlike Angela Watkinson, Cameron signed the Select Committee report that recommended downgrading cannabis. Unlike much of his party, Cameron voted in favour of the Sexual Orientation Regulations. Unlike most of his party, Cameron voted in favour of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. Cameron whipped his party to support the Government Bill that banned the creation of any more grammar schools. And so forth.
Now, after the mere capture of a marginal seat in Cheshire two years before a General Election, this approach is being held up as a triumph, so that there can, and will, be no departure from it either before or (if the Tories win) after the next General Election.
Herbert Thornton
May 23rd, 2008 7:04pmNick Kaplan cites the Cameron-answers-your-questions thread with an air of triumph - but he ignores what is missing.
The disappointing fact is that despite the importance of the issues of immigration and the need for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, Cameron remains evasively non-committal about them.
People are looking for a party that does offer firm policies on these matters, but it seems increasingly unlikely that Cameron's policies on them will be any different from those of Gordon Brown's Labour Party.
Anan
May 23rd, 2008 8:40pmWell done Edward and Dave!
2-6-Heave
May 24th, 2008 9:35amHerbert Thornton.
I think the picture that Nick Kaplan has attempted to paint here - one which I suspect we will be increasingly asked to believe - is not at all the real Cameron likeness. His appealing profile due wholly to the fact that he is held up as an alternative to the dereliction and ugliness of Labour.
As succinctly pointed out by David Lindsay above, Cameron is yet another career practicioner of a politics which struts and poses and promises on any number of sideline issues.
His hope, like that of the whole political set-up in the UK, is that THE big issue will come to a head on the watch after their own. All he wants to do is talk piffle in the hope that the lid stays on.
Nick Kaplan
May 24th, 2008 5:44pmDavid, I also thought the downgrading of Cannabis was a poor decision at the time, however since it was downgraded usage has decreased by 25% so there is no questioning that the result has been (mysteriously) positive, I don’t think you can criticize Cameron too much for this. I think Cameron’s decision to vote in favour of the Fertilisation and Embryology Bill was an entirely personal and he had every right to vote how he did (it was a free vote). On the more important issues Cameron voted against the clause that did not require a farther and he also voted to lower the abortion limit, showing a strong pro-family commitment consistent with the work done by IDS in his ‘breakdown Britain' report which Cameron has strongly backed and constantly refers to. On the issue of Grammar schools Cameron does not support them, but not for the usual leftist reasons, but because he has a better alternative; a voucher system. Furthermore, it seems strange for an ex-Labour party and social democrat such as yourself to criticise anyone for not supporting grammar schools, given that it is ideologues on your side that destroyed them. Cameron has also got good policy ideas for getting people off welfare and back into work. Furthermore he has continually referred to reducing the size of the state, but believes in taking a long term and sustainable approach to achieving this necessary goal i.e. by sharing the proceeds of growth. With regards to tax cuts Cameron is completely right not to make any up-front promises at this early stage given that there is no knowing what mess Brown will make in the next couple of years. I did disagree with the decision to stick to Labour spending plans, but they have only promised to do so up to 2010, so by the time they could potentially be in power this commitment won’t affect them. It therefore is a sensible tactical move meaning Labour can’t make any complaints about the ‘nasty party’ wanting to cut spending, and so far it seems to be working.
David Lindsay
May 26th, 2008 12:04am"On the issue of Grammar schools Cameron does not support them, but not for the usual leftist reasons, but because he has a better alternative; a voucher system."
No, that is the Spectator's policy, not his.
"it seems strange for an ex-Labour party and social democrat such as yourself to criticise anyone for not supporting grammar schools, given that it is ideologues on your side that destroyed them."
Not true at all. The first comps were in Tory LEAs, and it was Margaret Thatcher who, as Education Secretary closed so many grammars that there were not enough left at the end for her record ever to be equalled. In 18 years in office, the Tories never re-opened a single one.
"Cameron has also got good policy ideas for getting people off welfare and back into work."
Like what? Again, you are thinking of Spectator policies, not Conservative Party ones.